S3D version 3.0 is out

[geneb]

The bonus with Kisslicer is that you can try it for free.

g.

[JFettig]

Here bot, its 4.59x6.06, its as close as you're going to get. its not a wide open space like your asking for and I have no need to print one.

Layer 1.
[img]http://i.imgur.com/9sA6BVR.jpg[/img]

Layer 2 starting, already looks almost perfect
[img]http://i.imgur.com/8chtT17.jpg[/img]

Layer 2 done
[img]http://i.imgur.com/gCXPaj2.jpg[/img]

Layer 3, it could be done, but I programmed it to do 4
[img]http://i.imgur.com/xmkWJwn.jpg[/img]

[KAS]

Looks great, you still running the Rambo or did install the smoothieboard?

[JFettig]

Thanks

Rambo, the smoothie is for another printer.

That is actually the mount for the smoothie.

[bot]

Jfettig, no offence but unless you are willing to print the exact object I told you, your posts are pointless.

I'm not saying that every single print has a terrible top surface, but that specific larger ones did... and until I find out exactly why that is, I can't risk using v3.0

Calm your ego down... congrats, you can print will with v3.0. I hope you're proud. I'm trying to find out why a specific problem occurs...

[crocky]

Had my first crash last night.

Got up this morning to half done printout of lamp and the PC was off and that is very unusual, I think the writing may have been on the wall. It did not like the preview of the part because it only did half of it. I should have done a reset then!

Repowered and it appears to be running correctly again.

[JFettig]

I cannot emphasize this enough - PRINT OFF OF THE SD CARD WITH NO COMPUTER HOOKED UP!

[0110-m-p]

I cannot emphasize this enough - PRINT OFF OF THE SD CARD WITH NO COMPUTER HOOKED UP!

100% agree unless it is a dedicated print server on an EXTREMELY stable computer. Growing pains in the beginning of 3D printing made me find that out the hard way with dozens of failed prints. Now I print with a mix of SD card and Raspberry Pi print server running Octoprint.

As far as S3D V3.0.0 goes, I have been playing with it quite a bit and haven't had any real problems. Only problem I was having was with extrusion width and it ends up it was my 800+ hour E3D V5 nozzle that must have been worn out. Replaced it with a brand new V6 nozzle of the same size and all my extrusion problems went away.

I'm still using S3D and KISSlicer about 50/50 though and I technically prefer KISS for most things. S3D is just so damn fast, manual supports is awesome, and I love the GUI. I also still like being able to specify number of loops, top layers, bottom layers, extrusion width, and layer height separately without make them multiples of each other which is required in KISS. As much as I've tried, I can't bring myself to throw S3D away.

[EL Cuajinais]

They made an update to 3.0.1 today: Here is the changelog:

Version 3.0.1:

Fixed issue with bed leveling wizard that affected some specific printers
Improved bed and extruder setpoint tracking so that input boxes will not be affected when the temperature is turned off at the end of a print
Better prompts for the “Default” FFF profile when trying to overwrite it
Improvements for support extra inflation distance to ensure uniform support
Better support for native file associations
Better support for 3D models exported with meters as the length unit
Miscellaneous stability improvements

[crocky]

Well I have a dedicated tablet with windows 8.1 and that is what I have been printing from with simplify 3d and I have only had the one stoppage with 3.0. Seems to be okay with 3.0.1 so far…

I can use the card but I don't need to yet...

[KAS]

Really liking the fast honeycomb option.

[Micael]

You should beware that there is a very high chance that the fast honeycomb will make structurally weaker parts than the grid infill.

[nopick]

Mhackney, if you are still working on the blobbing problem you had, try putting in a little coast and negative extra restart distance. That cured some problems I was having in version 2 of the software with an older hotend. I think I was coasting 0.3 mm with a -0.05 mm extra restart. That was with an old Lulzbot Buda 2 hotend on a Taz 2.

[mhackney]

no pick, I got the blobbing issues sorted out but the nasty artifacts it creates in the paths on some of my parts (which I posted about on their forum and on the 2nd page of this one) is a show stopper. It isn't just the star openings where I originally discovered the problem, I've seen it on many other stock patterns I use. None of the other slicers do this, they create nice concentric perimeters around these features. No one at the S3D forum had anything to say and no one bothered verifying or checking the detailed test parts that I posted so I've shelved spending any more time on it. I don't know if earlier versions sliced the shell layers with these artifacts, I don't recall seeing them last year when I tried it and ended up getting a refund. This time I can't get a refund so I'll just test with each new release (the newest 3 point release also has the problem).

[bot]

I'm still using 2.2.2 and it's not bad. Can you still download 2.2.2? Since you have a licence, you might as well use it if you can.

[mhackney]

I don't know if I can and I don't have any confidence that it will slice these files without this artifact. Also, the reason I abandoned S3D before was the lack of infill support. 3.0 took a step forward with infill and I thought I could tease some good parts out of it. Unfortunately, my time is worth a lot more than the cost of this software and what I've already invested in it. You are welcome to slice the test file in 2.2.2 and see if the artifacts show up.

startest-4.stl

(28.6 KiB) Downloaded 685 times

simply slice it with whatever your regular settings are, it doesn't seem to matter as I've tried a large range of nozzle diameters, etc and they all result in the artifact. Once sliced, look at the first layer to see the issue. Take a screen shot and post it.

[bot]

Well, I just tested it but I probably don't need to post pics... you know exactly what it'll look like. I've seen your threads on the s3d forums. 2.2.2 exhibits the exact same behaviour.

[Micael]

Hi can't test it at the moment since I don't have an available printer, however from what I read, it seems like it's a mixture of having the setting of "Optimize start points for fastest printing speed" instead of "Choose start point closest to specific location", and having 2 angles on the grid infill instead of just 1, then assuming one wants 100% infill the the top solid layers and bottom solid layers should also be set to 0, if that is done, all the layers will move exactly the same, and the problem should be solved, something which can easily be seen on the preview mode by enabling retractions and travel moves, and then inspecting all the layers.

So basically the problem should be solved if the setting "Choose start point closest to specific location" is picked, bottom and top solid layers is set to 0 (assuming one wants 100% infill that is), and on the grid infill remove one of the angles (either the 45 or the -45).

Honestly in general it has been my experience one wants the "Choose start point closest to specific location" picked anyway, the default setting is questionable at best, I mean it probably is faster, but considering we are talking travel moves and it is basically 1 travel move between layers the difference should be always extremely negligible and it just ends up distributing the effects of layer transition problems around the model instead of putting them all in 1 place.

EDITED: After reading it more, doesn't seem to be the problem I thought it was, although this change of settings will probably still help, can anyone post a photo of the issue, since the only one is blurry and can't really tell what the issue is from that.

[KAS]

I believe this is one of the issue in the slice pathing. 1 perimeter I believe is correct, but you can see what happens when 3+ perimeters are added.

[img]http://s29.postimg.org/jv7cbvepz/model.png[/img]
[img]http://s29.postimg.org/7ulwb57bb/1_outline.png[/img]
[img]http://s29.postimg.org/z6h5chc1z/3_outline.png[/img]

[JFettig]

That isn't something I'm gonna get hung up about... just space the stars out by the width of the perimeters or something, its purely cosmetic in the first place.

[mhackney]

KAS, that is exactly right. That's why it is perplexing that 2 or more perimeters exhibits this problem.

JFettig, this is my design. This is a simple example. I have many more that I've developed over the last year that all have perimeter issues similar to this. Aesthetics are important to me. If I wanted to space the stars further apart I would have done that when I designed this part. I sliced and printed the original design in KISS and had no problems. It is a popular item so I thought I would use it as my entry into learning S3D in detail and, of course, immediately ran into this issue. My goal is not to find a slicer I can use for some things depending on geometry, etc but to find a slicer I focus on 100%. Right now, that is not S3D. If this issue gets resolved, I'm happy enough with everything else I've tested - and I did a lot of work to tweak surface quality, infill, multiple types of infill, etc. I really do like that aspect of the program. I've spaced the stars out in this case in the tests that I did. I can say that even with them further apart than the perimeters, the artifact can appear, it isn't that simple.

Micael, no printing is necessary to test this - it is a slicer issue and you can see the problem in the rendered gcode, no need to print. It's been verified now that this exists in 2.2.2 so no need for spending more time on this.

[JFettig]

When you design something to be machined and you're programming it and realize that if you did something slightly different it would be so much faster and better? It happens to me all the time. Same with printing, I'll draw something, slice it, look at the layers and see something I don't like so I go back and tweak it to make it better. It's just part of the game in my opinion.

Yes it is a software bug or flaw, its an easy one to work around

[ZakRabbit]

When you design something to be machined and you're programming it and realize that if you did something slightly different it would be so much faster and better? It happens to me all the time. Same with printing, I'll draw something, slice it, look at the layers and see something I don't like so I go back and tweak it to make it better. It's just part of the game in my opinion.

Yes it is a software bug or flaw, its an easy one to work around

You don't seem to understand that he's talking about a design that he sells. He has made these exactly to his design and there are other slicers that have produced exactly what he wants and what his customers have come to expect. The design is locked, the slicer must produce what he's already attained.

[JFettig]

I do understand. If it was my product I would consider it a minor detail and make the change as necessary

[Micael]

Personally considering it's a design already in production, and in it's current form it's working fine, I wouldn't change it, because the only reason to change is if there would be benefits for the design, which I'm assuming s3d isn't really going to offer, at least not for that specific one.

I believe this is one of the issue in the slice pathing. 1 perimeter I believe is correct, but you can see what happens when 3+ perimeters are added.

If that's the issue mhackney has there really is nothing to be done on S3D, the only things that would make a difference on the model inside the software is horizontal size compensation, but that doesn't change the way perimeters are sliced, it just changes the size of the stars, there is ofc also rotating the model 90 degrees, but that's changing the surface finish completely.

Micael, no printing is necessary to test this - it is a slicer issue and you can see the problem in the rendered gcode, no need to print. It's been verified now that this exists in 2.2.2 so no need for spending more time on this.

Yeah from the photos with the arrows you had placed on page 2 I thought you were having issues related to transition between layers, but the issues shown on the previous images is OFC completely unrelated to that, and having used S3D for the last year, there really is no setting to change the way perimeters are sliced